The Demonstrations in Minnesota (Update: Now Nationwide){Now International} (7 Viewers)

[TheDeparted]

Good for them - but some firearm safety classes should be their next order of business.

Also, this incident has already been memed to death - I'm surprised it hasn't been posted on this thread already.

 

[Loose Cannon]

Good for them - but some firearm safety classes should be their next order of business

Yep, terrible trigger discipline. Not only does Karen have her finger on the trigger but she's white knuckling the whole pistol.

 

[TheDeparted]

Yep, terrible trigger discipline. Not only does Karen have her finger on the trigger but she's white knuckling the whole pistol.

It's fortunate there were no errant shots. Adrenaline really lightens the trigger pull.

 

[Devildog]

Add to that the utter failure in muzzle discipline exhibited by the husband.

 

[First Time Poster]

so, I am not under the delusion that anyone will read this. But as I listened to the four panelists and facilitator - all Black, 2 males and 2 females and the panel chair was female - I took some notes.

I do *NOT* like conferences. Mainly because I hate people and have social anxiety. So a Zoom conference like this is something I can get with. I posted these notes over at MAP, but thought I'd follow up here.

Again, I know most people probably will scroll past, but for my own sense of closure, I'm gonna paste my notes here.

I couldn't really capture the entire Zoom panel, but I wanted to try and list a few of the topics that they hit on that were worth mentioning as they came up:

• it opened with each panelist talking about how the individually, emotionally talked about their responses to the current situation
  • to summarize, roughly, there was this bittersweet tension between hope and optimism and fatigue and anger. The positives that is this is a moment not seen since the Motown movement and, before that, the fight for emancipation. That so many people, from so many walks of life opening their minds to listen and see the racism. But also anger that it should not have taken this long. Fatigue from fighting this for so long, by themselves.
• The history of agreements between district attorneys and prosecutors with law enforcement to get deals that oppress Black Americans
• a focus on how prison systems and staff extend the racist arm of the law. Examples cited included:
  • sexual assault perpetrated against Black inmates by white staff members
  • relationships of cooperation between white staff members and incarcerated white supremacists
  • the rumor-mongering of Blacks threatening white supremacists, even when unfounded, to lead to instances of physical harm against Black inmates
  • security staff members equipping white supremacists with actual weapons while Black inmates are having to fashion their own, cruder weapons (e.g. shanks)
• A reference to reading James Baldwin's "Fifth Avenue, Uptown"
• a reference to Connick vs. Thompson (New Orleans case)
• a really interesting point that white people want to be the victims and the oppressors - white people in the US having a tendency to want it all, across all facets of society. And even this - which is a sort of arrogance on the part of white people. The need to be victims, oppressors, and saviors. One panelist found this odd and frustrating.
• The role that police unions and fraternal orders of police play in protecting these officers
• the reality that these organizations receive preferential treatment by default in local and state negotiations, as if they are not at fault and don't have to 'prove themselves' as worthy or even competent
• Reparations in society - discussions around education, material support. Attacking homelessness and houselessness and healthcare. These are bare expectations.
• Reparations re: defunding in law enforcement - look at the funding agencies to transform punishment to rehabilitation. Moving away from punishment and torture designs to things that can work through knowledge and building up when possible
• research partnerships established with police themselves - publicly funded support needs more access to publicly funded services, like education and the police. But the police are the most resistant to this
  • one example that was specifically cited was the disinclination and refusal to participate in studies to examine the efficacy of body camera usage in policing
• Shaming and "internet justice" isn't really justice. It doesn't do anything for the marginalized peoples but it contributes to a sense of justice that whites external to the trauma and punishment of Blacks feel is happening, but doesn't actually impact on the oppression and marginalization
• State and local legislatures need to be a bigger focus - not just Federal, which dominates too much of the discussion
• Emphasis on jails rather than prisons when it comes to the racialized nature of the systemic injustice
• The debates over Confederate Monuments - let's talk about not just taking down, but what merits going up. Why can't abolitionists be memorialized? This could be reparations. Because it's not just a discussion about what comes down but also what goes up. That's inspiring.
• A police officer responsible for the torturing of over 100 Black men becoming part of the Chicago school curriculum, so that AP US History includes things like that and lynching - that history about these things exist. Lynchings as terrorism. The frame of "white criminality" is part of curriculum reparations
• The history of police protecting "stuff" and defending "stuff" and investigating the recovery of "stuff" and this is usually white capital and property, as opposed to feeling like the police, as an institution, is not protecting Black People - it's wielded against Black people, in fact, often in favor of white people's "stuff." So the hierarchy is that white people's 'stuff' is more important than Black people
• Police culture > police individuals. The state (law and policy), the legal (lawyers who manage it) combine to create a system is 'reinvigorated' through a line of knowledge - even created and re-created by academics. We need to understand the current context and what rebellion would look like (it's not 1799 in Haiti). You can be amicable with a police officer - even a Black one in their community - but the individual is also separate from the system and the culture. We are trying to address the latter, not the latter
• Good cops vs. Bad cops - what do good cops look like? Are they whistle blowers? Then where are they? And if they cannot step forward out of fear - which is the assumption - that's the problem. How can we argue the good outnumber the bad?
  • example: a group of retired Black officers and members of the Fraternal Order of Police took a knee, symbolically, and there was no white officer who supported them
• People are too focused on the killings of cops but we need to look at things like the 13th amendment and it's about the wider sense of what the word "law" means and what it refers to - law as horizon rather than a set of tactics
• Discussion on what a post-abolition world would look like for each of the four panelists
  • one example is that we turn to institutions to trust rather than people, and we trust the political structure and the legal structure and the law enforcement structure, but we don't look at individuals and their stories. Because we don't 'trust and care' in one another - instead, we trust institutions
  • but a couple of panelists said that we don't know and that's the toughest challenge - we've never had it, we've never really seen it. And, as a result, without a vision or a goal, it is difficult to work toward something specifically
  • there was a collective skepticism when it comes to 'The State'

Alright, I tried to capture as much as I could, but it was difficult to listen and record some impressions.

Thanks.

This is that boss sheet that I like. Great work.

 

[James Spader]

Not buying their "fear of imminent harm" excuse
==========================================
A husband and wife brandished firearms at protesters outside their St. Louis home during a demonstration protesting both police brutality and recent actions by Mayor Lyda Krewson, authorities said Monday.

The incident unfolded at 7:23 p.m. CT on Sunday at the foot of Portland Place in the affluent St. Louis neighborhood of West Central End, officials said.

Police described the armed man, 63, and woman, 61, as "victims" of trespassing and fourth-degree assault.

"The victims stated they were on their property when they heard a loud commotion coming from the street," the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department said in a statement. "When the victims went to investigate the commotion, they observed a large group of subjects forcefully break an iron gate marked with 'No Trespassing' and 'Private Street' signs."

The neighborhood has streets with limited access that are considered private property.

"Once through the gate, the victims advised the group that they were on a private street and trespassing and told them to leave," the police statement said. "The group began yelling obscenities and threats of harm to both victims. When the victims observed multiple subjects who were armed, they then armed themselves and contacted police."

Albert Watkins, a lawyer for the couple — husband-and-wife attorneys Mark and Patricia McCloskey — insisted his clients were "in fear of imminent harm."...………………………..

MSN

www.msn.com

Perception is reality.

 

[Optimus Prime]

First, the white woman bumped into Takelia Hill’s teenage daughter. Then, she seemed to try to hit the black Michigan mother with her minivan.

And just moments later, Hill found herself in a suburban Detroit parking lot, staring into the muzzle of a pistol, as the woman aimed her weapon at Hill and yelled for her to move back.

“You f------ jumped behind my car, “Back the f--- up!”

The startling confrontation, which was partly caught on camera Wednesday afternoon, quickly went viral overnight. As of early Thursday, video of the confrontation had been viewed about 6 million times on Twitter.

For some viewers, the scene may offer a particularly tedious sense of deja vu: Just days earlier, a white couple in St. Louis gained national attention after they brandished their weapons at a group of protesters, most of whom were black and were walking down the couple’s private street.

This summer, America’s so-called “Karens” won’t stop at phoning the police about black people. Instead, they are armed, threatening to use their weapons on camera...............

MSN

www.msn.com

 

[B4YOU]

I’m “attending” this Zoom panel conference right now. There are 700+ of us in the call.

I’ve said before that we need to listen. And I know that’s not always easy because a lot of us don’t have real authentic contact with Black people and communities.

And social distancing has made this harder.

except where it’s made this easier. There are all sorts of distance opportunities that are out there. Like this one.

a panel of black scholars and academics, whose backgrounds are in social work and policing and law and incarceration and education and other fields.

but also as Black Americans who are living through this right now as Black Americans.

Is there a link to the recording?

 

[TheDeparted]

Just days earlier, a white couple in St. Louis gained national attention after they brandished their weapons at a group of protesters, most of whom were black and were walking down the couple’s private street.

This is the thing most people are glossing over. Are we heading to the abolition of private property? Because if we want to pretend that the owners of the property have no right to defend it from trespassers, then there is no private property.

 

[antipop]

This is the thing most people are glossing over. Are we heading to the abolition of private property? Because if we want to pretend that the owners of the property have no right to defend it from trespassers, then there is no private property.

i am not sure what they mean by 'private street'...a street that is maintained by the municipality where it's located would be a public right-of-way no matter what the people who live on the street think about it being private..i don't know what the case is here

 

[rajncajn]

i am not sure what they mean by 'private street'...a street that is maintained by the municipality where it's located would be a public right-of-way no matter what the people who live on the street think about it being private..i don't know what the case is here

I believe in those gated communities, the streets and most public works are paid for and maintained by the property owners themselves rather than the municipality, so that anything within the gates is considered private property. Still, the road in front of their house is not "their" property and unless the protesters were threatening to come into their home then I don't believe the couple had the right to threaten the protesters by brandishing weapons. The couple was right that the protesters had no right to be there, they just handled it very poorly and should have left it up to the authorities. If the protesters were, in fact threatening them and carrying weapons then they should have been smart enough to provide some evidence of that.

 

[St. Widge]

Yep, terrible trigger discipline. Not only does Karen have her finger on the trigger but she's white knuckling the whole pistol.

The good news is that she wasn't going to hit anything holding that thing one handed with a bent elbow.

 

[St. Widge]

I believe in those gated communities, the streets and most public works are paid for and maintained by the property owners themselves rather than the municipality, so that anything within the gates is considered private property. Still, the road in front of their house is not "their" property and unless the protesters were threatening to come into their home then I don't believe the couple had the right to threaten the protesters by brandishing weapons. The couple was right that the protesters had no right to be there, they just handled it very poorly and should have left it up to the authorities. If the protesters were, in fact threatening them and carrying weapons then they should have been smart enough to provide some evidence of that.

But, was this gated and was it maintained by the local government? I don't know the answer to the question. I know there are streets in New Orleans that were built by private individuals but are maintained by the City. In fact in a lot of places developers build streets on private property and then later turn the street over to the local government.

Regardless, those two still look like idiots holding weapons that the clearly don't know how to properly use. And, I agree that I don't think pointing the gun at people and likely threatening to shoot is really legal.

 

[TheDeparted]

i am not sure what they mean by 'private street'...a street that is maintained by the municipality where it's located would be a public right-of-way no matter what the people who live on the street think about it being private..i don't know what the case is here

Does the city maintain that road? That would put it in a gray area for me, at best.

Perhaps this is an assumption, but calling it a private road implies that the property owners exclusively provide for its maintenance. Access to the street is (was) gated by an iron gate marked as Private Property (or similar). The gate may or may not have been locked. Its status as unlocked would not give rights to passersby to occupy the property any more than leaving a vehicle unlocked would grant rights to a passerby to the contents of the vehicle or to the vehicle itself.

“You cannot control the comings and goings of citizens on your private street,” attorney Eric Banks, former St. Louis City Counselor, told St. Louis Public Radio. “I don’t care if you have gates there. I don’t care if you have off-duty police officers as security. It’s just not possible." source

If Mr Banks is correct, then what is the purpose of having a private street at all if literally anyone can come onto the property and you can't do anything about it? I'm not interested in the history of the area, but in the concept of private ownership of land and the rights of the owners to protect it.

Again, if you are not allowed to protect your property, then it really isn't yours, is it?

 

[antipop]

i am not sure if it's actually a private street or that the people that live there just decided that it was private...i don't think the city should maintain anything that is designated as private although i suspect with enough money you can buy the option for a publicly maintained private street

but if it's a public right-of-way then they have no right to defend that...i am also not buying that they were scared or threatened but you never know